This document summarizes two phases of testing of small caliber munitions against intermediate barriers such as automobile windshields and doors. In Phase I, all shots from 5.56mm and 7.62mm ammunition penetrated windshields and simulated doors, with more damage from 7.62mm. In Phase II, 1,600 rounds were fired at barriers like windshields at steeper angles, thicker truck doors, and concrete blocks to establish performance metrics for barrier penetration. Preliminary Phase II data showed varying penetration levels of barriers by different ammunition at 200 meters. The testing aims to evaluate real-world barrier penetration capabilities.

1. Effects of Small CaliberEffects of Small Caliber
Munitions ThroughMunitions Through
Intermediate BarriersIntermediate Barriers
Mr. Chris Gandy ARDECMr. Chris Gandy ARDEC
Mr. Jeremy Lucid ARDECMr. Jeremy Lucid ARDEC
Mr. Shawn SpickertMr. Shawn Spickert--Fulton ARDECFulton ARDEC
May 17May 17thth
20062006

2. Believe nothing youBelieve nothing you
hear, and only half ofhear, and only half of
what you think you see.what you think you see.

3. Rumors Suggest That Some 5.56mmRumors Suggest That Some 5.56mm
Projectiles can not Penetrate AutomobilesProjectiles can not Penetrate Automobiles
What are the Penetration Capabilities ofWhat are the Penetration Capabilities of
5.56 Ammo Against Intermediate Barriers?5.56 Ammo Against Intermediate Barriers?
Can Fielded Munitions meet the Needs inCan Fielded Munitions meet the Needs in
Iraq & Afghanistan?Iraq & Afghanistan?

4. Typical Intermediate BarriersTypical Intermediate Barriers
Concrete Wall Insurgent Vehicle
This Vehicle ran a Checkpoint in Iraq.
Could this have been Prevented?

5. Phase I ScopePhase I Scope
Evaluate Terminal Effects of SelectEvaluate Terminal Effects of Select
5.56mm & 7.62mm Ammunition Through:5.56mm & 7.62mm Ammunition Through:
–– Automobile WindshieldsAutomobile Windshields
–– Simulated Automobile DoorsSimulated Automobile Doors
Collect Static & Dynamic DataCollect Static & Dynamic Data
Analyze Using EDR MethodologyAnalyze Using EDR Methodology
– Effectiveffective DDamageamage RRating is a performanceating is a performance
metric currently in development at Picatinnymetric currently in development at Picatinny
Short StudyShort Study -- Rapid ResultsRapid Results

6. RealityReality ModelModel
Iraqi Checkpoint Test Setup

7. M4M4
(5.56mm)(5.56mm)
M240M240
(7.62mm)(7.62mm)
M16M16
(5.56mm)(5.56mm)
Ranges: 20m & 70mRanges: 20m & 70m
M80 (7.62mmM80 (7.62mm -- 147grain)147grain)
MK262 (5.56mmMK262 (5.56mm -- 77grain)77grain)
M855 (5.56mmM855 (5.56mm -- 62grain)62grain)
Intermediate BarriersIntermediate Barriers
No Barrier (Baseline)No Barrier (Baseline)
WindshieldsWindshields
Simulated Car DoorsSimulated Car Doors
M193 (5.56mmM193 (5.56mm -- 55grain55grain))
RANGE SETUP &
TEST
PARAMETERS

8. Windshield Test SetupWindshield Test Setup
90˚ Windshield 45˚ Windshield

9. Steel Plate SetupSteel Plate Setup
90˚ Steel Plates 45˚ Steel Plates

10. Data ExtractionData Extraction
RecoveredRecovered
ProjectileProjectile
ParametersParameters
GelatinGelatin
DamageDamage
ParametersParameters
High Speed VideoHigh Speed Video

11. Qualities & ConsiderationsQualities & Considerations
(Big Picture)(Big Picture)
Other FactorsAdequate Reach
Mission(s)Shape and Type of Effect
Operational
Environments
Number & Type
Time to AcquireEngagement Ranges
Logistics
Weapon Signature
Consistency
Legal RestrictionsIntermediate Barriers
Body Armor
Shot Lines

12. Evaluating ResultsEvaluating Results
• Numerous metrics available
• Understand capabilities & limitations of each metric
• Remember large number of variables and scenarios
encompassed
• Focus in on key performance characteristics and on
thresholds of performance
• Understand the expected range of variation in
“typical” use
• Assess general performance envelope

13. Phase I Preliminary ConclusionsPhase I Preliminary Conclusions
All Shots Penetrated all BarriersAll Shots Penetrated all Barriers
Measurable Damage was Observed in Gelatin SimulantMeasurable Damage was Observed in Gelatin Simulant
7.62mm Produced more Damage Than 5.56mm7.62mm Produced more Damage Than 5.56mm
Result Depends on Where Damage was InflictedResult Depends on Where Damage was Inflicted
Results Entered into ARDEC Database Where OverallResults Entered into ARDEC Database Where Overall
Performance Is Currently Being GaugedPerformance Is Currently Being Gauged

14. Phase II MethodologyPhase II Methodology
Short StudyShort Study –– Rapid ResultsRapid Results
If you can’t Penetrate the BarrierIf you can’t Penetrate the Barrier
then the Target can not be Reachedthen the Target can not be Reached
Ammo Capability not LimitationAmmo Capability not Limitation
–– Can you Breach the Barrier?Can you Breach the Barrier?
–– How Often does this Occur?How Often does this Occur?

15. Phase II ScopePhase II Scope
Evaluate Terminal Effects of 1,600 Rounds ofEvaluate Terminal Effects of 1,600 Rounds of
5.56mm & 7.62mm Ammunition Through:5.56mm & 7.62mm Ammunition Through:
–– Automobile Windshields at Steeper AnglesAutomobile Windshields at Steeper Angles
–– Simulated Truck Doors w/ Increased Shell ThicknessSimulated Truck Doors w/ Increased Shell Thickness
–– Concrete BlocksConcrete Blocks
Establish Quick Go/No Gages For IntermediateEstablish Quick Go/No Gages For Intermediate
Barriers To Assist In Assessing The ThreatBarriers To Assist In Assessing The Threat

16. Phase II Test SetupPhase II Test Setup
Weapons:Weapons:
M4M4
M16M16
M249M249
M24M24
M240M240
Ranges:Ranges:
75m75m
200m200m
USAMUUSAMU –– Ft BenningFt Benning

17. M118LRM118LR
M80M80
M193M193
M855M855
MK262MK262
M995M995
7.62mm Ammo7.62mm Ammo5.56mm Ammo5.56mm Ammo

18. Automobile WindshieldsAutomobile Windshields

19.  SteelSteel
ConcreteConcrete

20. Witness Sheet
.020” Al
Rear BarrierFront Barrier

21. Barrier 1 Witness
Plate 1
Partial
Penetration
Full
Penetration
Barrier 2
Witness
Plate 2

22. Preliminary DataPreliminary Data -- M16 (200m)M16 (200m)
No Penetration Full Penetration
Partial Penetration
Config 2
M193
AMMO
M855
M995
MK262
ConcreteTruck Door
Config 1
Windshield

23. Special ThanksSpecial Thanks
USAMUUSAMU –– Ft BenningFt Benning
Without the help and cooperation of LTCWithout the help and cooperation of LTC
Liwanag and the entire USAMU Team, thisLiwanag and the entire USAMU Team, this
test would not be possible.test would not be possible.
-- Thank YouThank You

24. Questions ?Questions ?
Chris GandyChris Gandy –– cgandy@pica.army.milcgandy@pica.army.mil
Jeremy LucidJeremy Lucid –– jlucid@pica.army.miljlucid@pica.army.mil
Shawn SpickertShawn Spickert--FultonFulton –– sfulton@pica.army.milsfulton@pica.army.mil